Thanks for the information, I was wrong, there were civilizations founded on godless systems of believe, I will read more about them, because I dont know much about Buddhism, and Taoism, I thing of them as cultic religions, the most secular of your examples would be Confucianism yet attempts were made to deify Confucius, it seems cultish. I though Buddhist are about finding a way out of re-incarnations and go to a place were one becomes a god. Anyway I. Kant was a theist and this is the subject for discussion. Another point is that Chinas present Civilization is taking a turn to western religions, not a going back to godless philosophies. Communism as well as all other godless philosophies seem to be on their way out. Never the less, thanks for the information on these godless civilization, How did these civilizations imparted their Moral Laws?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Kant-is this right?
- Thread starter sandandfoam
- Start date
Francine
Well-Known Member
When you continue your inquiries, have a look at the concept of "moral naturalism". This is the idea behind social Darwinism. Moral values evolve in a dynamic system. For instance, societies that allowed their members to be murdered, or allowed the fruit of their labor to be plundered by thieves would not long survive. Societies that have been around for centuries despite having no set of rules delivered by a god still have a set of rules, and these rules were worked out through trial and error based on which ones tended to preserve and enhance the well being of that society. We see this is true even in our society, we have Bible "absolutes" that permit slavery and polygamy, but we determined that slavery and polygamy was not conducive to a well-ordered society so we overthrew them.
I thought of given alternative proofs, I am not much of a fan of the Moral argument. My suggestion to I'm very new to this type of material and would appreciate some pointers. I read a synopsis of Kant that said "as far as reason goes it is just as likely as it is unlikely that god exists is drop it there are better argument than Kants.
I see, "moral naturalism". As far as I can ascertain Confucianism is all about Confucius said and everything he said is an absolute, if Confucius said it is true, this was essential (necessary) for the formation of the civilization. but as many of his absolutes are interpreted to justify actions that are clearly contrary to his teaching. On the Bibles absolutes Ill direct you to the fact that God himself incarnated and came to re-state His absolutes, this are the Gospels of Jesus Christ. I believe in evolution of Ideas and it sits well with Christianity, the NT explains the Ideas of the OT, we could say that the OT evolved into the NT and as the languages evolved there are better way to express it teaching. Slavery was abolished, it evolved to the term of, labour contracts, the principles are still sound, master do not exploit your contracted worker. Its sinful/immoral to do so, contracted worker be honest and turn a good days work for your master (the good, the bad and the ugly) this is moral. The Bible preaches against Polygamy in the OT, the Moral principle against it was introduced in Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife and they shall be one flesh. God is necessary for morality or a God like figure has to be put in it place ( an Idol)
Do you think that Kant was objective?
I think he was objective for his time period it was just impossible for him to draw the conclusions we have today simply because he did not have the evidence nor the science we have today. Keep in mind that in this time period scientist still believed "the material Universe is purely made out of Aether" (Rene Descartes). If we did not have carbon dating and evidence such as fossils and bones we may be inclined to think there is a possibility that the Earth is only 10-20 thousand years old. So, Kant does work from some peoples prospective as I said I do not agree with his thinking but then again just with a high school education (most of us) know more than he ever did about the nature of the universe. This is my point to certain religious groups if your going to make an argument don't shake a religious book at me but find some form of philosophy no matter how outdated it is and argue from that point if nothing else you do have a leg to stand on and you are coming at me with something that follows a certain path of logic.
harleydavidson
Member
too emiliano,,hi ,replying to your 1/1 post [which slipped by me],you say god is an agent ,ergo he is moved by good.God is not moved by anything. There is no preceeding from place to place ,nor is there any procession from potency [potential ] to act [actuality],,but then you knew that,didn't you.,,,harley davidson
OOPs, Thank Bill, I understand, you couldnt let me get away with, I almost did though, I will have to cut down on the Lambrusco or I will be caught out again.